Tanashat Mohammad, Manasrah AlMothana, Bataineh Omar Abdullah, Abdelrazek Ahmad, Abouzid Mohamed
Faculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Department of Internal Medicine, United Health Services- Wilson Medical Center, Johnson City, New York, USA.
Indian Pediatr. 2025 Jun;62(6):440-450. doi: 10.1007/s13312-025-00081-x. Epub 2025 Apr 29.
Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a standard treatment for children with moderate to severe respiratory distress; however, ventilators are often unavailable in developing countries. Bubble CPAP (bCPAP) is considered a simple, cost effective and less invasive alternative to CPAP, however, its efficacy has not been assessed for children with pneumonia until recently. This meta-analysis aims to compare the effectiveness of bCPAP with low-flow oxygen for treating severe pneumonia and hypoxemia in children.
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials reported up to March 23, 2024. Outcomes were reported as risk ratios (RRs) or mean difference (MD) and confidence intervals (CIs) using Review Manager software. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Three studies with 2030 patients were included and revealed no significant difference between bCPAP and control in overall mortality [RR (95% CI) 0.46 (0.09, 2.32); P = 0.348], death during hospital stay [0.48 (0.02, 9.09), P = 0.619], composite primary outcome [0.48 (0.12, 1.97), P = 0.301], pneumothorax [1.94 (0.16, 23.11), P = 0.601], leaving hospital against medical advice [0.63 (0.16, 2.39), P = 0.489], and length of hospital stay [MD (95%CI) 0.15 days (- 0.66, 0.96), P = 0.706]. Children on bCPAP had significantly fewer events of severe hypoxemia [RR (95% CI) 0.22 (0.10, 0.49), P < 0.001], and less requirement for mechanical ventilation [RR (95% CI) 0.38 (0.15, 0.99), P = 0.048].
bCPAP is not superior to low-flow oxygen for improving survival and reducing hospital stay in children with pneumonia, albeit the need for mechanical ventilation decreases.
持续气道正压通气(CPAP)是治疗中重度呼吸窘迫儿童的标准疗法;然而,在发展中国家,呼吸机往往难以获得。气泡式CPAP(bCPAP)被认为是一种简单、经济有效且侵入性较小的CPAP替代方案,然而,直到最近其对肺炎患儿的疗效尚未得到评估。本荟萃分析旨在比较bCPAP与低流量吸氧治疗儿童重症肺炎和低氧血症的有效性。
检索了PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、Web of Science和CENTRAL,以识别截至2024年3月23日报告的符合条件的随机对照试验。使用Review Manager软件将结果报告为风险比(RRs)或平均差(MD)以及置信区间(CIs)。P值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
纳入了三项研究,共2030例患者,结果显示bCPAP与对照组在总体死亡率[RR(95%CI)0.46(0.09,2.32);P = 0.348]、住院期间死亡[0.48(0.02,9.09),P = 0.619]、复合主要结局[0.48(0.12,1.97),P = 0.301]、气胸[1.94(0.16,23.11),P = 0.601]、自动出院[0.63(0.16,2.39),P = 0.489]以及住院时间[MD(95%CI)0.15天(-0.66,0.96),P = 0.706]方面无显著差异。接受bCPAP治疗的儿童严重低氧血症事件显著减少[RR(95%CI)0.22(0.10,0.49),P < 0.001],机械通气需求也更少[RR(95%CI)0.38(0.15,0.99),P = 0.048]。
尽管机械通气需求减少,但在改善肺炎患儿的生存率和缩短住院时间方面,bCPAP并不优于低流量吸氧。